[REBOL] Re: RFC: Forms generator / RAD dialect
From: robert:muench:robertmuench at: 22-Aug-2002 9:40
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [rebol-bounce--rebol--com] [mailto:[rebol-bounce--rebol--com]]
> On Behalf Of [atruter--hih--com--au]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 2:09 AM
> To: [rebol-list--rebol--com]
> Subject: [REBOL] Re: RFC: Forms generator / RAD dialect
> I agree, but isn't the answer just to make better use of styles. eg.
Hi, I don't know. I won't call me a VID expert at the moment. My goal is
to let people that don't know how to program, that don't know about
Rebol write down a specification of there needs and have a generator do
the rest. These kind of people understand the concept of a button and an
associated action that's it.
> ; Derived types
> lab-address: lbl "Address:"
> fld-address: field to-width 3
Hm... This is very domain specific. It should be more general.
> lab-date: lbl "Date:"
> fld-date: date-field
A Date field with calendar selector etc. is OK. This is just a heavy
weight widget that can be used. I see these things positioned into a
widget-library or functions that assemble lower-level into higher-level
> Defining things in this manner means we can easily make
> global changes to both VID types and our derived types.
For the developer of the framework I agree. The user of the dialect
doesn't care about it.
> I believe this approach is more efficient than trying to create
> a dialect that is used to essentially achieve the same
> result, but feel free to point out the flaws in my logic /
> approach. ;)
As said, IMO it's a question about what kind of target users you see. I
see my friends not able to program and begging me for this and that app.
If I can concentrate on the framework let them do there little reblets